Speaking of the K9 and the Glomar Challenger, have a look at the documentary on the efforts to raise it: Azorian: Raising of the K9 (or something like that - it is or was available on Netflix streaming). Very interesting look at the engineering marvel it was to even attempt to bring the sub up from over 3 miles -- all the while in secrecy.
3TB is high-end, always more expensive than it should be.
Not really. Luckily I had just finished purchasing 10 of the 3TB drives for a NAS server before the flooding. The price was about 50% more than 2TB drives - maybe a few points more or less depending on market fluctuations. 6-12 months before that I would've been paying the bleeding-edge premium - which is why I waited until the GB/$ price had come more into line with the 1 and 2 TB drives.
Technically this isn't the old AT&T we're talking about. This is Southwest Bell. The old AT&T was purchased by SWB several years ago and the name kept for it's market recognition. That part is pretty much fact. Your other questions require some speculation and opinions.
I think the basic interoperability and compatibility built into the telecom infrastructure makes mergers seem very natural. Sure it's not perfect (sometimes far from it) but it's a heck of a lot easier for one telecom to absorb another and merge their operations than it is for other industries. For example, take the auto industry: if Ford were to buy a GM production facility, they would pretty much gut it and retool the entire thing. But if AT&T buys Telecom X, they simply (haha! bad choice of words I know) maintain the status quo at X as operations are merged into AT&T's infrastructure. (and while the pink slips for X employees are being printed)
Not exactly. I'm pretty sure the discs you get in the mail are licensed to Netflix under very specific terms. Once that license runs out, it would be quite reasonable to presume the discs no longer under license couldn't be rented out any longer. You may be thinking of the old mom-n-pop business model where once they had purchased a VHS tape they could re-rent it as many times as they liked until the tape failed. The studios hated that. In fact I recall hearing a radio piece back in the late 80's/early 90's regarding a new type of tape technology that could only be played a fixed number of times until it became unplayable. The studios were drooling over this way to stick it to the mom-n-pop shops. Had Blockbuster not become as successful as it did with it's licensing and per rental payments back to the studios, this technology probably would have been pursued more vigorously. Unfortunately for the mom-n-pops, they were going under either way.
Why would a linguist of all people have such a romantic attachment to the idea of an unchanging English language?
"For a linguist like me, this is very exciting but for your average pedant this is horrifying."
I didn't really see anything in the article indicating he desired an unchanging English language or even particularly critical of the changes he's observing.
Windows makes people feel better about their computer skills (or lack thereof). Doesn't matter if there are new or better or cheaper or whatever alternatives -- Joe User (who is definitely NOT a slashdot reader) can go down to Walmart, buy a printer, bring it home and hook it up. Or buy a piece of software and install it himself. Or download a new application (Joe User really likes doing this!) He doesn't have to call anybody or ask for help or feel stupid. This makes Joe User feel good about himself and appear more "computer literate" than his even more clueless family and peers around him. (He really likes that last part!)
But take Joe out of his cozy little Windows comfort zone and stick him in front of a Linux/BSD/whatever box and he suddenly realizes how little he knows, doesn't look quite so smart to his peers and curls up in a fetal position until he can get away from all those "inferior, broken, toy OS's" and back to the only "right and proper" OS ever invented (in his opinion, Windows)
I read it a little differently. They're not referring to digital-only content. They're talking about digital copies of print content. For example "Watchmen" would still be available in print presumably from anybody (except B&N who's voluntarily choosing not to carry it anymore) - while the digital version of the same title would only be available from Amazon.
Now, is B&N making a smart move? Probably not. But probably one that will be applauded by local mom-n-pop comic dealers. Is B&N taking a bold stand against exclusivity deals that hurt the consumers? Don't kid yourself - if they had ability to pull off such a deal, they'd be doing the very same thing.
Rabid Star Wars fanbois would pay top dollar for 3 days beta (read: early) access - probably enough to buy a nice dinner out or put your kid in private school for a year - or something in between.
Easily offset by the sales of Amazon Prime memberships after the free month trial period. Assuming a $10/unit loss it'll only take one new subscriber out of every 8 units sold to recoup the loss. Sure there's costs associated with providing AP but also other benefits to Amazon other than selling more Kindles -- increased sales of other items, selling non-Prime streaming content (the Prime content sure ain't anything to write home about), etc.
Especially for some of the older models, check ebay first to see what they're selling for. You may be surprised at what some DIY drive rebuilders will pay for an exact match of a drive they're trying to fix. That useless-to-you old 40GB drive may contain the exact drive motor or controller somebody's looking for (and willing to pay for).
That's all it is. Netflix is betting that they've locked up exclusive rights to some blockbuster (no pun intended) titles for the next few years. Do they think they'll make money on the specific Dreamworks titles they've licensed? Nope. But if it works out that those titles become "must-see" titles, it'll bring subscribers in. And then hopefully they'll have some strategy in place to retain those subscribers. It's no different than a department store advertising an item at a loss in order to get people into the store. Or a network buying a sports package (example: Fox taking the NFC football contract in the early-mid 90's) knowing that while they may not make money on the games, it'll be a positive benefit for the network overall (promoting their network during games, games as a lead-in to other programming, etc.)
I'm surprised nobody has brought up the subject of privacy yet. I'm pretty sure that any business paying to be routed this way is going to want some kind of statistics or metrics for their money. At the very least they're going to want to know how many times their locations were included in routes. And potentially much more - such as time of day, endpoints of the overall route, etc. So somehow the device is going to have to be able to communicate back to some central server - either in realtime or possibly in batch when maps are updated. Sounds like the old smartphone tracking mess all over again.
How on Earth could they plan on marketing something like this and who would buy it? ("Buy our device! It gives you worse routes by DESIGN!") And who would sell it? Target? Knowing that if they get outbid by Walmart the device you bought from their store is going to send you driving past Walmart? And while IANAL, I gotta believe there must be some sort of implied agreement or contract that if one is buying a GPS device that calculates routes, it should calculate the best possible route for the PURCHASER. I can't imagine using something like this even if it was given to me free.
But just wait until I have the knob patented! I'll be having so many papers served on my patent infringers! When the process server comes knockin' at the door they had better open . . . um, maybe I need to think about this some more . . .
In theory it should be simple, as the author suggests it is, to pick up a cheap replacement cable. However in fact, many of those cheap replacements have non-standard length (does a standard even exist?) tips. As a result, often they either make no contact or the connection is so delicate it's essentially useless. If I happen to find a brand/vendor with satisfactory products, I usually stock up (I go thru these things like crazy at work).
It may be a little bit premature to call the DVD (and I'm presuming you lump Bluray in here as well) market "dying" (in my opinion the market isn't dying until it starts losing shelf space at Walmart/Target). As it stands today, disc media generally offers FAR more value than streaming in the form of extras, subtitling (yeah, I know some streaming services are starting to offer this), and other stuff on the disc. If none of this is of interest to a consumer, then streaming may a good fit for them. But speaking for myself, streaming as it is today is nothing more than a higher resolution (and sometimes not by much) VHS substitute.
Slashdot Mirror
Will the sequels be called C++ , Objective-C and C#? Will they even be called sequels or SQLs?
Yeah, but what other OS would allow you to time travel backwards? From November 2011 to June 2011 . . .
Oops, that should be "K129" rather than "K9".
Speaking of the K9 and the Glomar Challenger, have a look at the documentary on the efforts to raise it: Azorian: Raising of the K9 (or something like that - it is or was available on Netflix streaming). Very interesting look at the engineering marvel it was to even attempt to bring the sub up from over 3 miles -- all the while in secrecy.
3TB is high-end, always more expensive than it should be.
Not really. Luckily I had just finished purchasing 10 of the 3TB drives for a NAS server before the flooding. The price was about 50% more than 2TB drives - maybe a few points more or less depending on market fluctuations. 6-12 months before that I would've been paying the bleeding-edge premium - which is why I waited until the GB/$ price had come more into line with the 1 and 2 TB drives.
Technically this isn't the old AT&T we're talking about. This is Southwest Bell. The old AT&T was purchased by SWB several years ago and the name kept for it's market recognition. That part is pretty much fact. Your other questions require some speculation and opinions.
I think the basic interoperability and compatibility built into the telecom infrastructure makes mergers seem very natural. Sure it's not perfect (sometimes far from it) but it's a heck of a lot easier for one telecom to absorb another and merge their operations than it is for other industries. For example, take the auto industry: if Ford were to buy a GM production facility, they would pretty much gut it and retool the entire thing. But if AT&T buys Telecom X, they simply (haha! bad choice of words I know) maintain the status quo at X as operations are merged into AT&T's infrastructure. (and while the pink slips for X employees are being printed)
Not exactly. I'm pretty sure the discs you get in the mail are licensed to Netflix under very specific terms. Once that license runs out, it would be quite reasonable to presume the discs no longer under license couldn't be rented out any longer. You may be thinking of the old mom-n-pop business model where once they had purchased a VHS tape they could re-rent it as many times as they liked until the tape failed. The studios hated that. In fact I recall hearing a radio piece back in the late 80's/early 90's regarding a new type of tape technology that could only be played a fixed number of times until it became unplayable. The studios were drooling over this way to stick it to the mom-n-pop shops. Had Blockbuster not become as successful as it did with it's licensing and per rental payments back to the studios, this technology probably would have been pursued more vigorously. Unfortunately for the mom-n-pops, they were going under either way.
Or it has to appear in the Oxford English Dictionary. I'll accept that.
Webster's a little short for ya?
I used to love that show - what ever happened to Emanuel Lewis?
Why would a linguist of all people have such a romantic attachment to the idea of an unchanging English language?
"For a linguist like me, this is very exciting but for your average pedant this is horrifying."
I didn't really see anything in the article indicating he desired an unchanging English language or even particularly critical of the changes he's observing.
I've got a Z80 right here. I can't imagine how fast a Z68 must be!
Did they finally break that 65536 bytes barrier?
Obviously the Z68 is 12 Zs slower than the Z80 . . .
Windows makes people feel better about their computer skills (or lack thereof). Doesn't matter if there are new or better or cheaper or whatever alternatives -- Joe User (who is definitely NOT a slashdot reader) can go down to Walmart, buy a printer, bring it home and hook it up. Or buy a piece of software and install it himself. Or download a new application (Joe User really likes doing this!) He doesn't have to call anybody or ask for help or feel stupid. This makes Joe User feel good about himself and appear more "computer literate" than his even more clueless family and peers around him. (He really likes that last part!)
But take Joe out of his cozy little Windows comfort zone and stick him in front of a Linux/BSD/whatever box and he suddenly realizes how little he knows, doesn't look quite so smart to his peers and curls up in a fetal position until he can get away from all those "inferior, broken, toy OS's" and back to the only "right and proper" OS ever invented (in his opinion, Windows)
The paranoid would say that this is a plan by the HDD manufacturers to get people to switch over to SSD's instead.
Really??? Does anybody-- paranoid or otherwise -- think HDD manufacturers are plotting and scheming to put themselves out of business?
I read it a little differently. They're not referring to digital-only content. They're talking about digital copies of print content. For example "Watchmen" would still be available in print presumably from anybody (except B&N who's voluntarily choosing not to carry it anymore) - while the digital version of the same title would only be available from Amazon.
Now, is B&N making a smart move? Probably not. But probably one that will be applauded by local mom-n-pop comic dealers. Is B&N taking a bold stand against exclusivity deals that hurt the consumers? Don't kid yourself - if they had ability to pull off such a deal, they'd be doing the very same thing.
Rabid Star Wars fanbois would pay top dollar for 3 days beta (read: early) access - probably enough to buy a nice dinner out or put your kid in private school for a year - or something in between.
Easily offset by the sales of Amazon Prime memberships after the free month trial period. Assuming a $10/unit loss it'll only take one new subscriber out of every 8 units sold to recoup the loss. Sure there's costs associated with providing AP but also other benefits to Amazon other than selling more Kindles -- increased sales of other items, selling non-Prime streaming content (the Prime content sure ain't anything to write home about), etc.
Especially for some of the older models, check ebay first to see what they're selling for. You may be surprised at what some DIY drive rebuilders will pay for an exact match of a drive they're trying to fix. That useless-to-you old 40GB drive may contain the exact drive motor or controller somebody's looking for (and willing to pay for).
I guess that means they haven't decided if it should go in the version 8 due after lunch, version 9 tomorrow morning, or version X next Tuesday . . .
That's all it is. Netflix is betting that they've locked up exclusive rights to some blockbuster (no pun intended) titles for the next few years. Do they think they'll make money on the specific Dreamworks titles they've licensed? Nope. But if it works out that those titles become "must-see" titles, it'll bring subscribers in. And then hopefully they'll have some strategy in place to retain those subscribers. It's no different than a department store advertising an item at a loss in order to get people into the store. Or a network buying a sports package (example: Fox taking the NFC football contract in the early-mid 90's) knowing that while they may not make money on the games, it'll be a positive benefit for the network overall (promoting their network during games, games as a lead-in to other programming, etc.)
I'm surprised nobody has brought up the subject of privacy yet. I'm pretty sure that any business paying to be routed this way is going to want some kind of statistics or metrics for their money. At the very least they're going to want to know how many times their locations were included in routes. And potentially much more - such as time of day, endpoints of the overall route, etc. So somehow the device is going to have to be able to communicate back to some central server - either in realtime or possibly in batch when maps are updated. Sounds like the old smartphone tracking mess all over again.
How on Earth could they plan on marketing something like this and who would buy it? ("Buy our device! It gives you worse routes by DESIGN!") And who would sell it? Target? Knowing that if they get outbid by Walmart the device you bought from their store is going to send you driving past Walmart? And while IANAL, I gotta believe there must be some sort of implied agreement or contract that if one is buying a GPS device that calculates routes, it should calculate the best possible route for the PURCHASER. I can't imagine using something like this even if it was given to me free.
Two words for ya: Prior Art.
Do you really think that they'll all of the sudden stray from the standards enough to break your corporate site?
Absolutely.
I'm pretty sure the patent on doors has expired.
But just wait until I have the knob patented! I'll be having so many papers served on my patent infringers! When the process server comes knockin' at the door they had better open . . . um, maybe I need to think about this some more . . .
In theory it should be simple, as the author suggests it is, to pick up a cheap replacement cable. However in fact, many of those cheap replacements have non-standard length (does a standard even exist?) tips. As a result, often they either make no contact or the connection is so delicate it's essentially useless. If I happen to find a brand/vendor with satisfactory products, I usually stock up (I go thru these things like crazy at work).
It may be a little bit premature to call the DVD (and I'm presuming you lump Bluray in here as well) market "dying" (in my opinion the market isn't dying until it starts losing shelf space at Walmart/Target). As it stands today, disc media generally offers FAR more value than streaming in the form of extras, subtitling (yeah, I know some streaming services are starting to offer this), and other stuff on the disc. If none of this is of interest to a consumer, then streaming may a good fit for them. But speaking for myself, streaming as it is today is nothing more than a higher resolution (and sometimes not by much) VHS substitute.